''Kennedy had not decided what to do with the Vietnam problem”
Paper #2: JFK – What if
John Kennedy’s untimely death left many to wonder whether he would have taken us down the same path as LBJ did in Vietnam. There exists tantalizing evidence put forth by his supporters that claims he would have avoided the Vietnam quagmire and may indeed have withdrawn American forcesafter the 1964 election. What do you think? Knowing what you do about the Cold War dynamics of the 60s and JFK’s mindset, would this nation have avoided the Vietnam War if Kennedy had not been killed?
You need to have: thesis ( state your position as soon as possible), persuasion (examples as evidence) AT LEAST 3 ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF YOUR THESIS, awareness (admit weaknedd in your argument),Focus (how those facts support your argument)
When Kennedy became president in 1961, he continued the policy of Eisenhower in Southeast Asia. He use limited military force to fight communist forces, he Proclaimed a war against the spread of Communism, and he support the unstable French government of South Vietnam politically, economically and militarily.
His supporters think that if Kennedyhad finished his presidential term, the Vietnam war would have been differently, because, accordingly to Robert Mc namara, Kennedy was seriously considering withdrawing U.S. forces from Vietnam after his reelection in 1964. In this position paper my objective is to prove that U.S. would avoided the Vietnam War if Kennedy had not been killed.
in the sixties we have the confluence of two worlds, onethat ends, the post-war, and one begins to sprout, the globalization and postmodernity in late twentieth century. Kennedy alone can represent the touchstone of change and transformation process.
The people can think that was impossible that Kennedy wants to avoid the war because was contradictory with the previous policy and their actions at the beginning not differ too much from those of some ofhis predecessors, but his figure, his charisma, his public image, his gestures were understood by a society, eager for change, as the symbol of the arrival of new time and he wanted to show that they were right. On June 10, 1963, Kennedy gave a speech that was very famous, because he talked about global peace and security. In this speech he invites all the nations to achieve peace by usingdiplomacy, strength United Nations to be an instrument to help to achieve and promote peace and create an international system where weapons can be abolished.
My first fact is that he was trying to make the things in a different way, he was very critical about the massive retaliation adopted by Eisenhower, “aggressively against President Eisenhower´s foreign policy record, and in part on a mythical“mille gap” (Goldstein, p.31). A good example is In Laos, when was a ceasefire and a meeting with Khrushchev in Vienna, where the two leaders agreed to the neutrality of Laos and then he signed a treaty with the USSR and Great Britain for banning nuclear tests. So we can see that he was trying to change the policy towards the Cold War, negotiations and treaties instead of bombing and weapons.
We needto analyze the way that he acts in previous conflicts in order to predict which could had been his position in Vietnam. In the Bay of Pigs on Cuba´s south-western coast he mention that he would not intervene militarily to salvage the operation, he knew that “the cuban armed forces are stronger, the popular response is weaker and our tactical position is feebler than we had hoped”(Goldstein,p.39). He knew that if America do not intervene, the invasion would be impossible, and even with all the pressure of his advisors and public opinion he Refused to further intervention. This fiasco, humiliate Kennedy, but at the same time strengthen him. Since this moment he would never again be “overawed by professional military advice” (Goldstein, p.41.), he would decide the best interest for...